6 ms·

> ...mostly by regulation, right? Mostly by bad reviews, lawsuites and bad PR. One good example of this is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide https://en

by tn13 10y ago

> ...mostly by regulation, right? Mostly by bad reviews, lawsuites and bad PR. One good example of this is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide While everyone thinks that it was an evil pharma that should have stopped by regulators it appears that the pharma company lost billions but saved by regulators instead. >we can all hope that all parent read about all accidents that kill people and then independently come to the smart conclusion Neither parent not bureaucrats can do that 100% correctly. Parents can do it infinitely better that the people in washington. Babies will die no matter what. > let's put some smart people in a room and let them make a recommendation. Like smart people deciding on housing loans, student loans, cheaper healthcare, invasion of Iraq ? It eventually snowballs into a giant problem that makes the original problem far less worse. Smart people do not possess the intelligence or information to make decisions for others.

matt4077 10y ago
You're really bringing Thalidomide, of all examples? To quite the Wikipedia article you linked: For correctly denying the application despite the pressure from Richardson-Merrell, Kelsey eventually received the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service at a 1962 ceremony with President John F. Kennedy. In September 2010, the FDA honored Kelsey with the first Kelsey award. The award, given annually to an FDA staff member, came 50 years after Kelsey, then a new medical officer at the agency, first reviewed the application from the William S. Merrell Company of Cincinnati.[109] Cardiologist Helen B. Taussig learned of the damaging effects of the drug thalidomide on newborns and in 1967, testified before Congress on this matter after a trip to Germany where she worked with infants with phocomelia (severe limb deformities). As a result of her efforts, thalidomide was banned in the United States and Europe. I mean, it did take a while, but they didn't just give her an award – they _named_ the thing after her when they finally got around to recognize her. Meanwhile, in places where the market was regulating itself: Throughout the world, about 10,000 cases were reported of infants with phocomelia due to thalidomide; only 50% of the 10,000 survived.
- tn13 10y ago
  It only strengthens by argument. FDA saved people from Thalidomide ? What about over 100K people who lost their life because FDA delayed approval of Provenge and many other life saving drugs ? What about the near monopoly that FDA has granted to EpiPens ? What about millions of Americans who can afford basic healthcare because of FDA's compliance costs and die as a result ? Just for sample check this : http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2010/11/FDA-Delay-of-One-Drug-Causes-Lost-Life-Years/Page-01 http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2010/11/FDA-Delay-of-O... FDA or market based regulation totally depends on the outcomes and at least for me it is very apparent that market is extremely good at figuring out what works and what not than FDA. Also at significantly lower costs. >Throughout the world, about 10,000 cases were reported of infants with phocomelia due to thalidomide; only 50% of the 10,000 survived. It is actually a very good example of how quickly market can detect signals and respond to it. FDA in this case is purely awarded for being slow. FDA has a very poor history of preventing harmful drugs one has to only look at the list of lawsuites after which the drugs ere taken back from market.
danieltillett 10y ago
Thalidomide is not a good poster boy for regulation as it was not regulation, but sloth that stopped the approval of thalidomide in the USA. If the company involved had decided to hold off selling it in other countries first the FDA would have approved it.

by tn13 10y ago

matt4077 10y ago

You're really bringing Thalidomide, of all examples? To quite the Wikipedia article you linked: For correctly denying the application despite the pressure from Richardson-Merrell, Kelsey eventually received the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service at a 1962 ceremony with President John F. Kennedy. In September 2010, the FDA honored Kelsey with the first Kelsey award. The award, given annually to an FDA staff member, came 50 years after Kelsey, then a new medical officer at the agency, first reviewed the application from the William S. Merrell Company of Cincinnati.[109] Cardiologist Helen B. Taussig learned of the damaging effects of the drug thalidomide on newborns and in 1967, testified before Congress on this matter after a trip to Germany where she worked with infants with phocomelia (severe limb deformities). As a result of her efforts, thalidomide was banned in the United States and Europe. I mean, it did take a while, but they didn't just give her an award – they _named_ the thing after her when they finally got around to recognize her. Meanwhile, in places where the market was regulating itself: Throughout the world, about 10,000 cases were reported of infants with phocomelia due to thalidomide; only 50% of the 10,000 survived.

tn13 10y ago
It only strengthens by argument. FDA saved people from Thalidomide ? What about over 100K people who lost their life because FDA delayed approval of Provenge and many other life saving drugs ? What about the near monopoly that FDA has granted to EpiPens ? What about millions of Americans who can afford basic healthcare because of FDA's compliance costs and die as a result ? Just for sample check this : http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2010/11/FDA-Delay-of-One-Drug-Causes-Lost-Life-Years/Page-01 http://www.lifeextension.com/magazine/2010/11/FDA-Delay-of-O... FDA or market based regulation totally depends on the outcomes and at least for me it is very apparent that market is extremely good at figuring out what works and what not than FDA. Also at significantly lower costs. >Throughout the world, about 10,000 cases were reported of infants with phocomelia due to thalidomide; only 50% of the 10,000 survived. It is actually a very good example of how quickly market can detect signals and respond to it. FDA in this case is purely awarded for being slow. FDA has a very poor history of preventing harmful drugs one has to only look at the list of lawsuites after which the drugs ere taken back from market.

danieltillett 10y ago

Thalidomide is not a good poster boy for regulation as it was not regulation, but sloth that stopped the approval of thalidomide in the USA. If the company involved had decided to hold off selling it in other countries first the FDA would have approved it.